Published: 13:00, 01 February 2018
| Updated: 13:42, 01 February 2018
A millionaire property tycoon has failed in his bid to sue a YouTube star for £10,000 after a county court district judge threw the case out.
Fergus Wilson’s decision to ban “coloureds” from any of his rental properties sparked outrage and the 69-year-old was targeted by Danny Hyde during a video posted in March 2017.
Mr Wilson took offence to being branded a rude term and attempted to sue Mr Hyde, from Somerset, for £9,999 after claiming his insults breached the 1988 Malicious Communications Act.
During a case heard at Yeovil County Court yesterday, a judge dismissed the case brought against the 29-year-old painter and decorator, stating it had “no basis in law”.
Mr Wilson was found to have breached section 12 of the 2010 Equality act when he sent instructions to a letting agent stating he did not want “coloured” people in his properties because of dealing with curry smells at the end of their tenancy.
Mr Hyde, a YouTuber with 1,300 subscribers, suggested Mr Wilson was "coming across as racist" due to the policy.
The case took place in the landlord’s absence and he was ordered to pay £3,000 in legal fees to a legal access charity.
Mr Hyde was represented on a pro bono basis by Gerard Clarke of Blackstone Chambers.
Following the case’s dismissal Mr Hyde posted a video to his followers as he celebrated the decision with a can of Stella Artois from his Glastonbury home.
In his video he said: “Next time you sue me Fergus try and actually turn up. I was there ready to be sued and Fergus, who was doing the suing, was nowhere to be seen.
“We have learnt it is perfectly legal to call Fergus Wilson a xxxxx so guys, knock yourselves out.”
He also thanked his legal team for all their help.
Mr Wilson, of Boughton Monchelsea, suggested the case should be heard at the Supreme Court after the judge deemed the case not suitable for a county court.
He said: “The actual words in his video should be beeped. I would have found that acceptable. People should exercise care using anything that would adversely influence schoolchildren.”
Mr Wilson has always denied he was racist, and had argued this particular housing criteria was on economic grounds due to dealing with food aromas.